EHRA members and healthcare IT vendors are optimistic about complying with information-sharing regulations as penalties for information blocking begin. Despite ongoing regulatory developments, industry collaboration has enabled readiness for wider electronic health information (EHI) accessibility. The focus is shifting from information blocking to sharing while educating consumers about shared data complexities remains crucial. Privacy law variations at federal and state levels pose challenges, and legal cases may clarify data control scenarios. EHRA’s proactive stance and collective efforts are shaping the evolving landscape of information exchange in healthcare.
The HIMSS Electronic Health Record Association (EHRA) is upbeat about the initiatives taken by its members to promote greater sharing of Electronic Health Information (EHI) and to stay ahead in terms of compliance, an evolving aspect, as a result of the implementation of penalties for information blocking.
The Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General has begun to enforce fines for information blocking. These penalties can be up to $1 million and cover potential compliance violations for “acts and omissions.”
Information Sharing Readiness and Consumer Education
Healthcare IT vendors have been diligently preparing for two years to ensure the availability of patient electronic health information for access, exchange, or utilization by September 1. This information was conveyed by leaders from the Electronic Health Record Association (EHRA).
Various means, such as patient portals, web interfaces, APIs, and a multitude of technologies and platforms, have been employed to achieve this goal. However, while the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) finalized its rule on June 27, the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT is still refining certification regulations proposed earlier this year, as shared with Healthcare IT News this week.
Leigh Burchell, a member of the EHRA’s executive committee and vice chair of the information blocking compliance task force at Altera Digital Health, mentioned, “From a regulatory standpoint, information blocking is still evolving.” She further explained that the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT is continuously introducing measures to facilitate easier access, exchange, and utilization of information. Despite the enforcement date set by the OIG, she emphasized that there is more to come, and the industry will continue its efforts to meet these evolving requirements.
The term “info sharing” encapsulates the unprecedented collaboration that the organization has undertaken to enable the accessibility of patient data, ultimately enhancing the ability of healthcare providers to offer comprehensive care.
EHRA has expressed concerns about the challenge IT companies face in balancing new regulatory compliance with other requirements from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Despite being competitors, members such as David Bucciferro from Foothold Technology-Radicle Health and chair of the EHRA’s executive committee, along with Dr. Bill Hayes from CPSI and EHRA vice chair, acknowledge that their members have risen to the challenges presented by the Cures Act’s intentions.
Bucciferro highlighted how the industry’s collective response to information blocking led to a unique unity, as companies endeavored to understand and adhere to the emerging rules governing information sharing. He noted that the initial focus on information blocking transitioned into a broader perspective centered around information sharing.
Dr. Bill Hayes affirmed this perspective, stating, “Agreed. That is the whole concept of this thing.”
The importance of educating healthcare consumers on the nature of shared information, its sharing mechanisms, and the potential limitations regarding certain patient data is paramount in ensuring regulatory compliance for health IT. This task is anticipated to be challenging for vendors, particularly due to the diverse and evolving landscape of privacy laws at the federal and state levels. For instance, in Maryland, there is a pending referendum on the 2024 ballot that could impose legal restrictions on reproductive data.
The challenges do not end here; legal aspects also come into play. Burchell mentioned ongoing discussions about situations where patients seek their data directly from vendors if unable to obtain it from their healthcare providers, who are not currently penalized for withholding information.
The implications of information blocking in such scenarios and the dynamics surrounding on-premise installations where data control is limited raise questions. Additionally, in the next few years, discussions will ensue concerning the obligation of healthcare entities to adhere to state and federal laws governing medical record release. This may also lead to instances where concerns of privacy breaches under HIPAA are raised.
Burchell also noted that many of these scenarios involving data segmentation and data withholding may find resolution in court cases. She mentioned that the HHS Office of Civil Rights is currently investigating Vanderbilt University Medical Center due to a legal dispute involving transgender patients who claim that unauthorized disclosure of their health information violated their privacy.
